When my macbook pro became vintage/obsolete, my first plan was, to save money for a new one and in the mean time “mess” around with Linux.
First of all: Until a year ago I’d never looked, let alone, tried Linux in generally, so my first experience (with Ubuntu) was a pleasant surprise. The only hickup I had, was a daily freeze or kernel panic in the system. I always thought it was caused by my machine and accepted in my daily routine, to restart the computer once or twice a day.
A friend told me to try Arch, because of its stability and recommended me Manjaro, because of its easy install. I’ve tried, but somehow the live cd sees the mac as a Bios machine instead of an EFI one. (I’ve read it’s a mac thing) So each time I needed the USB to boot the system, again I accepted it, until the last big update when my machine couldn’t boot Manjaro at all.
In the meantime I was very pleased with Arch, so I searched and found Antergos. I read that the Installer “sucked”, but when I tried it, it was almost a revelation to me.
Then came the two biggest surprises for me, Antergos boots on its own on my machine AND no freezes or kernel panics ever!
I really like the possibilities, although I’m still learning, the stability and the friendly community. Also, I don’t have to cross my fingers anymore when I start my machine after a large update.
The only doubt I have now, is whether my new machine will be a Mac or a Dell XPS, because I really don’t miss the mac enviroment at all, thanks to Antergos.
Well, I still have a month to decide, because than I saved enough money to buy either one of them…

Gnome/XFCE/i3-WM

Everybody is a genius, but if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing its stupid.

This is a good question. I actually am not yet an Antergos user, but I think that it’s going to go on my new desktop. I know for sure that I would prefer to have an Arch derivative than a Debian derivative. I found that the revenge installer for Arch bypasses most of the annoying parts of “the Arch way,” and that’s cool. I still have Arch running on the first machine I ever got it running on, but I have to say that I love the way Arch and its forks handle package management. I also think that the AUR is a great resource as well.

Right now, I have Manjaro running on 2 systems and Arch on the 3rd. But I have a new machine being delivered on Wednesday and I think I’m going to run Antergos on it.

@karasu thanks for the reply. I totally understand what you mean about the headaches. I think I’m also just trying to try every Arch/fork OS that I can. Loved Manjaro; can’t get Apricity working, and I have yet to hear a bad thing about Antergos. So I think I’m going to see how we do.

I’d like to add that I chose archlinux for pacman, an arch based distro for faster installation and finally that manjaro’s installer failed miserably at my LVM on LUKS on GPT setup (didn’t even boot after seemingly successful installation). I have done all of the setup by hand before, so I would have been able to try and fix it, but: time is money. Antergos did so much better.

I’ve used 'em all, since 2002 exclusively inside Linux, and 2 years before that experimenting with Red Hat.

I’ve used so many distros over time. I am presently using Manjaro and installing Antergos in a VM box as we speak. Before that I was with SolydXK which is a spin-off of Mint/Debian for Xfce and KDE.

Why I am writing is to learn the answers that everyone is giving to this very question you ask: Why do you use Antergos?

I did try to install Arch, but honestly I don’t have the time to figure out the install, and my system is complicated with 3 HDs and 2.4 terabytes. I settled on Manjaro but have been reading a lot about Antergos being a “closer” or “more pure” version of Arch than any other. Do you find that true?

I did like the installation (still going on last I checked) and how I could choose my DE (I prefer Xfce). I like rolling distros.

Antergos is a very easy way to install Archlinux* + Antergos repos + friendly forum/persons

you can install printer/graphical requirements/Desktop/Firewall/AUR and more at the Antergos installer

One thing I noticed in the Arch forums is that Arch developers and users are elitists. They do not “hang out” or even tolerate other distros like Manjaro to be discussed on their forums.

Do they think of Antergos users and developers the same way? Antergos seems “closer” to Arch than Manjaro, but is it just as ostracized by the Arch community as any other Arch-based distro, and in that sense nothing more than just an unofficial and unsupported distro as far as Arch goes?

I know Debian and Ubuntu work together. Sometimes Connical passes code back down to Debian and it is incorporated in their code. Debian seems proud of all of the distros that build off of their base and even brag about it. Seems different over here, almost like there’s an unspoken enmity between Arch and distros based on Arch. There’s an unspoken tension of the Arch based distros that almost feels like a family feud where members of the family come together for a celebratory dinner but nobody talks with one another.

Antergos uses the Archlinux repositories + antergos repos, manjaro uses its own repo.
Some manjaro packgs. can still be installed on Arch and Arch based distros but it’s not recommended 'cause can break the system;
AND i guess Manjaro and Arch will be so different at some point in the future that “crossusing” packages from both distros will be impossible. That’s another reason why i like Antergos, the hope of being forever compatible with Arch.
I have no intention of discussing about Arch users behaviour, sorry.